'There's a culture of impunity': investigating deforestation in South America

Bolivia has become the second-worst nation in the world for the loss of primary forests; the team at the Gecko Project decided to ask why

Global forest loss reached record highs last year after a surge in wildfires, according to University of Maryland and Global Forest Watch analysis.

Fire became the leading cause of forest loss for the first time in 2024 in tropical regions, but this is not a natural development. Wildfires are frequently started by people. It could be that a small fire gets out of control and spreads, or it could be set intentionally to clear trees. Other major causes of forest loss include deforestation for industry, including cattle ranching, other types of agriculture and timber.

Despite a global pledge to halt deforestation agreed at Cop26 in Glasgow in 2021, 17 of the top 20 forested nations are losing trees at a faster rate today than when the deal was made.

Bolivia has climbed up the list of countries affected by deforestation. Photo credit: W.Vargas

One country which has experienced increasingly heavy deforestation is Bolivia. This prompted the team at the Gecko Project, a journalism non-profit, to investigate. They found some surprising answers to the question of why Bolivia is losing its forests, and these came together in a documentary entitled Bolivia Burning which is available on YouTube now.

Wild Crime recently spoke to David Hill and Alvaro Garcia, the team behind the film, to find out what they learned.

Where did the idea for the film come from?

David Hill: We had spent years looking at deforestation. Looking at South America made sense in terms of the amount of forest being cleared. But we felt that Bolivia was being ignored. There was very little, if any, coverage in the media about what was going on there. And very few international NGOs were working on it.

Over the last few years, Bolivia has gone from fourth place in the world in terms of losing primary tropical forests, to third, and then last year to second. It’s higher in Brazil, but Brazil is many times larger.

So Tom [Johnson, of the Gecko Project] was very keen to make a film for those reasons. And he was also very interested in the Mennonites, both in terms of their role in Bolivian deforestation and the key role they play in the soy industry, which is one of the two biggest drivers.

Alvaro Garcia: David and I wrote a report a couple of years ago for Global Witness about Bolivia being one of the biggest countries with the highest rates of deforestation. This information was a driver for Tom to take the decision to embark on this project.

How did you come to focus on wildfires?

DH: We knew there were fires and we were following things very closely before we went. Then we arrived right in the middle of what turned out to be the worst ever year for fires in Bolivia’s history. We were on the plane with a group of Spanish firefighters that were coming over to help the Bolivians deal with the problem.

From our first day in Santa Cruz we felt it. We went up to one of the tallest buildings in Santa Cruz on our first night and saw the smog.

And because of the interrelationship between the fires and the deforestation, it was something we really wanted to explore. And so that became the jumping off point for the film itself. The film itself, the story, evolved very organically.

What are the main drivers of deforestation in Bolivia?

AG: [The main drivers are] the agricultural and cattle ranching industry. We know everybody is conscious that they have been the main drivers. The problem with that is that at the moment, the city with the most amount of resources generated is Santa Cruz. That’s thanks to this business. But they pay very little in terms of taxes.

Bolivia is in a deep economic crisis and they see the agriculture industry as a way to get out, get more resources. The consequences are very bad.

There’s a scene in Bolivia Burning where a mennonite colonist is speaking about the impact on the area’s wildlife. What are the consequences of devastation?

AG: Well, it was very ironic that he recognises the fact that [it was an area] that was big and beautiful, it was humid, it was green. And there were these deers and these animals and jaguars. And now you see the field and the field is absolutely empty.

It’s heartbreaking. I mean, two minutes before that, because that was a field that was still on fire. As David mentioned, the film developed very organically and we were just standing by a big massive trunk that was still very hot. And we were just like, okay, yeah, this is really bad. It was a very heartbreaking moment. Because, I mean, you can see the state of the land.

In one of the clips, we’ve been driving for hours and hours and all we’ve seen is burnt forests. We’ve been working on environmental issues for quite some time, many, many years. David would agree with me that it’s the first time that we’ve seen this level of disaster.

And it was very humbling and very shocking as well.

DH: It’s a good word. It was very humbling. It was sad. It was heart-wrenching at times. The forest itself was very quiet. The animals, the birds had gone.

In the film, you show a chart comparing permits for forest clearance and the actual amount of forest cleared. The latter is much higher. How much of this clearance is illegal?